No case for foxhunting

As Basil Fawlty said: "Cuddle one of these and you'll never play the guitar again"

I don’t subscribe to the view that while British soldiers were dying in Afghanistan, it was wrong to run a story about two young girls being mauled by a fox in their own home. Two little girls have been nastily injured and that would have been a story whatever else was going on.

But neither do I agree that this case furthers the argument to repeal the hunting ban. We have plenty of foxes around here and as soon as they see you, they scarper. None would dream of coming into the house and if they did – ban or no ban – they’d be lucky to make it out again. But truly urban foxes – those that live in London boroughs and inner city areas – are much more used to human presence and have learned that we are rarely a threat (at least intentionally) and they can outpace us in unenclosed spaces.

Foxes are highly evolved predators, which makes them efficient hunters but also rather unpleasant killers of domestic pets. There is a reason, after all, that hunting was initiated in the first instance ie to protect livestock. That reason still holds but the Hunting Act has been in force for five years now and livestock numbers have not dramatically fallen and foxes are still controlled in the countryside – often, it has to be said, by huntsmen.

The difference in behaviours between the urban and country fox means that trying to use an urban context to justify a country pursuit is just nonsense. I maintain that illiberal though the Hunting Act may have been, the country has moved on and there are more pressing things to attend to. As you can see in the Daily Mail comments, the nation is totally polarised on this issue – the anti-hunt lobby are prepared to libel the mother in the story by insinuating that foxes weren’t responsible for the attack and the pro-hunt viewpoint is that we should be able to kill these animals as necessary.

My heart instinctively wants hunting back – it was a spiteful, class-fuelled sop that has done little for animal welfare. I respect the traditions of the countryside and believe in supporting the people who live there. But my head says no – there is simply no justification for the coalition to split itself and everyone else into opposing camps for an issue that in overall terms matters little other than to quench the thirst for revenge.

There are better battles to fightConservatives should let this one go.

Going to the dogs

The Hunting Act 2004 was undoubtedly an affront on civil liberties. It was a spiteful, mobbish and class-motivated piece of social wrecking imposed by a liberal political elite onto a significant minority of the country whose ways they never understood.

I remember as a student writing articles opposing the ban and it’s easy to remember that the act formed part of the 1997 manifesto, taking seven years for Labour to enact. It has achieved very little – the hunters still like to kill foxes “by accident” after the hounds get “out of control” and the antis still like to commit acts of vandalism and assault in the name of “animal rights”. How either party feels it owns the moral high ground is beyond me.

The ban remains a dreadful example of badly-drafted and devisive law that fails to serve the common good. But I’m dismayed that the Conservative manifesto is promising a free vote – effectively repealing the act. Yes, the 2005 manifesto says:

“A Conservative Government will therefore introduce a Bill, and offer
Parliament a free vote, to overturn the Government’s ban on hunting with
dogs.”

But 2010 Britain has moved on. Labour blundered their way through this issue, eventually only returning to it to please the leftist anti-war crowd. The fight has been had. Labour has ruined the economy and placed Britain into huge debts; they’ve fought expensive pointless wars; they’ve expanded the public sector beyond the size that the private sector can afford; they’ve curtailed civil liberties in so many areas and smote business with everything they had. Labour has taxed, tinkered, toyed and torn the country to bits and now they are terminal decline.

The Conservatives have so, so many things to put right. Resurrecting the hunting issue will divide a society that desperately need unity and force social strife where we need recovery, consolidation and statesmanship. Moreover, it will paint the party as narrow-focussed and hell-bent on looking after its own before the nation as a whole. Labour stooped lower than low with the hunting ban – we must, must not stoop ourselves and for the sake of first term success, leave this damned law out of the 2010 manifesto.

UK plc is already going to the dogs; Conservatives cannot make doing the same an option.